Oddball
Unobtanium Member
What crisis?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'll say the same thing I said in that thread you made weeks ago. You parrot what others tell you to think. The CBO report clearly indicates that the savings are more than significant with the Republican's proposals.And the letter is a summary of the report, a report which came out weeks ago and you couldn't be bothered to read the report then, rather you parroted what someone in the press said. That's what you do; you parrot.
I'm not parroting and you're trolling. So again, if you would like to discuss that thread, go to that thread.
I'll say the same thing I said in that thread you made weeks ago. You parrot what others tell you to think. The CBO report clearly indicates that the savings are more than significant with the Republican's proposals.
1) I think there should be laws against coverage refusal for pre-existing conditions.. but that the market should determine what the charges for each insurance policy should be based on risk, etc
2) You WANT improvement for your agenda.. you do not "NEED" a government 'solution'
3) Your finances and your well being are your personal issue.. whether it be your treatment, how you pay for it, whether you go bankrupt, whether you have to do without cable tv, whether you have to work 3 jobs to pay for something, or whatever else
4) Christianity is not about forced support... nice try... so if I wish to continue donating to the church or St. Jude's children's fund out of the goodness of my heart, that is up to me.. but not up to you to force me to do so
5) Being against gay marriage but for equality in civil unions for legal means such as inheritance, power of attorney, joint tax returns, etc has nothing to do in this discussion... but nice try
1.) You do realize that a pre-existing condition against a woman who was a victim of domestic abuse is just as bad as making her pay out the nose?
2.) I want improvement for this country. The GOP plan will not do anything.
3.) You seem to be in agreeing with Dubya that it's really American to have 3 jobs. Despite the fact even with 3 jobs you still can't afford health insurance.
4/5.) Christianity is not about forced support. However, whatever happened to being your brother's keeper. You seem to lap up the whole part about Gays in the Bible but not that part. Why is that?
By the way, what you're proposing is this:
Separate but equal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jack the deficit by $8 to $10 billion to achieve no significant results???????
Now THERE'S a real plan????????????????????
Jack the deficit by $8 to $10 billion to achieve no significant results???????
Now THERE'S a real plan????????????????????
Yeah.. you would rather support the one that spends over a trillion to worsen the quality of the system and infringe on personal rights
Now that's brilliant
Jack the deficit by $8 to $10 billion to achieve no significant results???????
Now THERE'S a real plan????????????????????
Yeah.. you would rather support the one that spends over a trillion to worsen the quality of the system and infringe on personal rights
Now that's brilliant
Where did I say that? Please provide the quote or link.
Yeah.. you would rather support the one that spends over a trillion to worsen the quality of the system and infringe on personal rights
Now that's brilliant
Where did I say that? Please provide the quote or link.
So you support neither... same as me
Then I guess the question is better asked of which one do you support more.?? Or asking if you support the government giving care of personal responsibility and well being to the non-contributor at the sake of the contributor?
Where did I say that? Please provide the quote or link.
So you support neither... same as me
Then I guess the question is better asked of which one do you support more.?? Or asking if you support the government giving care of personal responsibility and well being to the non-contributor at the sake of the contributor?
My main goals are to provide an affordable option for the "working poor" and to get primary care out of the ER . I'd like to achieve these as efficiently and cost effectively as possible.
I'm waiting to see what gets through the process before deciding which I think achieves those goals better.
So you support neither... same as me
Then I guess the question is better asked of which one do you support more.?? Or asking if you support the government giving care of personal responsibility and well being to the non-contributor at the sake of the contributor?
My main goals are to provide an affordable option for the "working poor" and to get primary care out of the ER . I'd like to achieve these as efficiently and cost effectively as possible.
I'm waiting to see what gets through the process before deciding which I think achieves those goals better.
Provide or make available??
And if you do mean provide?? Then forcing the payment of the personal well being of one non-contributor at the expense of the contributor??
So you support neither... same as me
Then I guess the question is better asked of which one do you support more.?? Or asking if you support the government giving care of personal responsibility and well being to the non-contributor at the sake of the contributor?
My main goals are to provide an affordable option for the "working poor" and to get primary care out of the ER . I'd like to achieve these as efficiently and cost effectively as possible.
I'm waiting to see what gets through the process before deciding which I think achieves those goals better.
Provide or make available??
And if you do mean provide?? Then forcing the payment of the personal well being of one non-contributor at the expense of the contributor??
Provide an affordable option. And if that means forcing people.....
Provide an affordable option. And if that means forcing people.....
That says it all, right there.